Just wait and he will be hated - more popular he will be - higher in ranking he will be there will be new haters

I remember year ago or don´t know when but here was similar thread about Ferrer - he was hard-working nice guy who isn´t hated

Now he is No.1 enemy for many people... he is biggest vulture in universe...

You will see some people will come up with something vs Nishikori you will see

It's quite simple - you know you're doing something RIGHT when you get to have a good amount of pathetic 'haters'. Nishikori isn't yet there already, but his time will come soon enough... if he manages to back up his Tokyo victory with a few other good victories, especially in case there's some top dog involved.
It's one of the Laws of MTF if I'm not mistaken, and if it isn't yet, I kindly request Jon to include it in his list.

10-08-2012 11:28 PM

uxyzapenje

Re: Is Nishikori the highest ranked player with no haters on MTF?!!

Suck it not haters

10-08-2012 11:26 PM

Coolio_Jack

Re: Is Nishikori the highest ranked player with no haters on MTF?!!

Its funny how the same things that people hate about Ferrer, can be said about Nishikori, and he seems to be loved from those same haters.

The truth is, even though every player is diffrent, the closest in style similarity to Nishikori is Ferrer, even personality wise. Go figure.

10-08-2012 10:43 PM

Sophitia36

Re: Is Nishikori the highest ranked player with no haters on MTF?!!

OK, then. I'm not particularly obstinate about sticking to the term "match-up". The only thing I'm saying is, Nishikori has a positive H2H against Ferrer in spite of being ranked lower, and is not associated with very pleasant memories for a Ferrer fan. So a stupid or immature Ferrer fan would have reasons to hate him.

If you prefer, let's just say that Nishikori was lucky both times because Ferrer played badly for various reasons. I don't care how you interpret it really

I'm not going to play your game by trying to provide a pseudo-technical analysis (or even a true technical analysis - you are a very good example that being able to do that that is by no means a guarantee of objectivity or rationality).

First because I do not claim to be a great specialist in terms of analyzing match-ups, second, because I did not really take time to analyze Nishikori's game in detail, and don't have time to do it now, and third, because I don't feel the need to disguise my every argument with plenty of figures/pseudo-facts/grand technical vocabulary just to make it look more serious (and I'm not saying that's what you do, but I'm sure quite a lot of people do that here, and of course I cannot necessarily tell who does this).

I don't play tennis, I have no great technical knowledge, the only knowledge I have is that of a fan who's been following the sport for about 16 years with varying degrees of interest. I claim no higher expertise than being able to draw a few conclusions while watching matches, provided I put my mind to it, and I have no problems admitting this.

Now, when I say Ferrer's USO defeat against Nishikori was seen as a humiliation, I'm basing this on various comments that I've read about it. No matter how promising Nishikori was, it seems to me that his victory over Ferrer was his first against a top 10 player, and definitely for a top ten player, being beaten by someone who's ranked so much lower is always somehow humiliating, at least until said player is proved to have been worth more than his ranking.

I love how you try to build a rational argument with your own biased opinions as a basis. Of course, in your dreamworld, Nishikori is a better player than Ferrer so nothing of what I'm going to say makes sense. But in the real world, Ferrer is world n°5 and Nishikori is n°15.

Why do I say Nishikori is a bad match-up for Ferrer? Well, simply because he has beaten him 2 times out of 3, in spite of being ranked far lower.

And why humiliating defeats? Well, because even though Nishikori had already been doing well before that, his victory against Ferrer in 2008 in the US Open was quite a surprise and it was deemed a counter-performance for Ferrer (whether they were right or wrong, people certainly made fun of him for losing to Nishikori - and based on rankings alone, they were right since Ferrer was n°4 Nishikori was ranked only 63 by the end of his great 2008 season).

Actually it certainly was a big counter-performance from Ferrer, it was also one of his most embarrassing moments (the bitching against the umpire thing), AND the beginning of his big slump that left him with no titles at all in 2009.

The loss at the Olympics was also a big surprise, and a great disappointment both for Ferrer and his fans. The Olympics meant a lot to him, and with Nadal injured, he was the best hope for Spain, many people expected him to get a medal. So, this one was maybe not humiliating, but it was certainly quite unexpected and quite difficult to swallow.

So, yes, for a Ferrer fan, Nishikori would certainly be associated with very bad memories, although not as bad as Gael Monfils.

I call BS on this. So, according to you, Kei is a bad matchup for Ferrer simply because he beats him? Well, that's very convincing I'm sorry, but you can't just call it a bad matchup because the player you like struggles against one you don't like. For instance, Nadal is a bad matchup for Federer, not because he beats him but because Federer's BH can't handle his wicked topspin FH, Federer is a bad matchup for Soderling because he can take his time away from the baseline and force him to play defense where he gets easily outmanouevered, etc... this is what bad matchups are. Claiming bad matchup just because one players beats another, with no tennis reasons to back it up is pretty much meaningless. What exactly does Kei do that makes him a bad matchup for Ferrer?

And Kei isn't a better player than Ferrer (yet anyway), but he's definitely more talented and has a higher ceiling.

Those defeats were hardly humiliating, in both cases although Ferrer was deemed favorite Kei was recognized as one of the most talented young players who could break through at any moment. It's not he lost to a random journeyman, can't see how it was embarassing at all; his tirade against the umpire surely was, but the defeat in itself wasn't.

I don't understand all of this "he's an extremely aggressive player" stuff. I don't know where people have got this from. To me, he's the definition of a relatively successful Bollettieri clone.

What can you do, some people like to believe that he is an aggressive player.
I just don't know what kind of an aggressive player is capable of hitting 0 winners in a whole set of tennis, and I've seen Nishikori do it.

I would love to know why exactly Kei is a bad matchup for Ferrer. What matchup advantage have you identified in their past matches? Kei has beaten him in USO and Olympics because he's a more talented player, that's all.

And also, how exactly is a close 5 set defeat at USO and close three set defeat at Olympic 'humiliating defeats'?

I love how you try to build a rational argument with your own biased opinions as a basis. Of course, in your dreamworld, Nishikori is a better player than Ferrer so nothing of what I'm going to say makes sense. But in the real world, Ferrer is world n°5 and Nishikori is n°15.

Why do I say Nishikori is a bad match-up for Ferrer? Well, simply because he has beaten him 2 times out of 3, in spite of being ranked far lower.

And why humiliating defeats? Well, because even though Nishikori had already been doing well before that, his victory against Ferrer in 2008 in the US Open was quite a surprise and it was deemed a counter-performance for Ferrer (whether they were right or wrong, people certainly made fun of him for losing to Nishikori - and based on rankings alone, they were right since Ferrer was n°4 Nishikori was ranked only 63 by the end of his great 2008 season).

Actually it certainly was a big counter-performance from Ferrer, it was also one of his most embarrassing moments (the bitching against the umpire thing), AND the beginning of his big slump that left him with no titles at all in 2009.

The loss at the Olympics was also a big surprise, and a great disappointment both for Ferrer and his fans. The Olympics meant a lot to him, and with Nadal injured, he was the best hope for Spain, many people expected him to get a medal. So, this one was maybe not humiliating, but it was certainly quite unexpected and quite difficult to swallow.

So, yes, for a Ferrer fan, Nishikori would certainly be associated with very bad memories, although not as bad as Gael Monfils.

To have no haters on MTF you basicaly must have:
- a good agressive allround game, no pushing or mooballing
- be consistant, no shocking losses
- good character, no clowning
- good looks, without any abnormalities

Well, if I were as childish as certain people who are around on MTF, I would definitely hate Nishikori. Because he's a bad match-up for Ferrer, and inflicted him some of his most humiliating defeats.

Should I push the reasoning a bit further, and say that the fact of having haters or not for a player does not depend on whether there is truly "something to hate" about him, but rather on the level of maturity of the haters in question?

People will always find things to hate. If you have flaws, they'll hate you for them, if you don't have any visible flaws, they'll make up some for you, or they'll hate you for being perfect and boring. Hating is just another word for jealousy.

I would love to know why exactly Kei is a bad matchup for Ferrer. What matchup advantage have you identified in their past matches? Kei has beaten him in USO and Olympics because he's a more talented player, that's all.

And also, how exactly is a close 5 set defeat at USO and close three set defeat at Olympic 'humiliating defeats'?

To have no haters on MTF you basicaly must have:
- a good agressive allround game, no pushing or mooballing
- be consistant, no shocking losses
- good character, no clowning
- good looks, without any abnormalities

So yes, Nishokiri is on a good road.

10-08-2012 07:29 PM

Mateya

Re: Is Nishikori the highest ranked player with no haters on MTF?!!

To have no haters on MTF you basicaly must have:
- a good agressive allround game, no pushing or mooballing
- be consistant, no shocking losses
- good character, no clowning
- good looks, without any abnormalities

I don't see why Tsonga should have any haters. He is the most entertaining player in the top 10 and is a nice and respectful guy. People only pick on the little things about him like his victory dance, or the fact that he decided to bite the ball once rather than smash his racket.

The more sucess Kei has the more likely he is too gain some haters unfortunately.

I doubt he will ever be topping MTF disliked polls though he just naturally dosent provoke reaction the way some of the other guys do.

Logically, its expected to work that way, but Kei - if you notice, lacks a certain personality that is required for consistent hating. Even if he starts succeeding consistently, people who have to hate will find faults in his style or at best start calling him zero-personality or some such thing or have no reason at all. Like this poster below:

I'm not a "hater" and I dislike the way many people on here talk about players they don't like, but I'm far from a Nishikori fan. He's not very exciting to watch and while is game is efficient, I have doubts about how far it can take him. He just seems to a bit predictable and he lacks that "spark" needed to be a top player.

Sadly, that opinion will not grow popular in MTF

This thread has more than 15 replies.
Click here to review the whole thread.